Gene Kranz's Remarkable Self Incriminating Gaffe, The Storied Ship, " Fraudulent Apollo 13 "

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

FLASH, they ain't nothing but cash stealing PERP SKANKS....

MUCH MUCH MORE than $1,000,000 SayonaraJupiter. How much did that nit wit Lovell get for the Apollo 13 script from Opie Taylor, you know the script that your mom paid to have written ? You got that right, heck of a lot more than $1,000,000.

Obviously, one of the great fears when this bad boy blows is the kickback thing. Armstrong and his fabled stock picking. You KNOW THAT IS GONNA' TURN OUT TO BE KICK BACK RELATED.

So we are gonna' have stuff ultimately like;

FLASH !!!!! The "First Man On The Moon" is nothing but a skank that could be bribed !!!!!!! Armstrong did his phony moon walk thing and took $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for it in various and sundry ways!!!! EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL 'BOUT IT!!!!

AND...........

FLASH!!!!! Lovell is a big fat rat skank too, our parents paid his salary, Now we pay that creep's pension, and his kids are sitting on $100,000,000 of our money , money made from that dumb ditz Ron Howard's movie, "DON'T SPANK US IN SPACE ....WE'RE ONLY LYING TO PROTECT THE COUNTRY YA' KNOW FOR GOD'S SAKE !!!!"

It's true SayonaraJupiter, from Slayton to Shepard to Armstrong to Big Fat Fatso Berry to that awful fake of a phony PERP he makes ya' so mad BIG FAT LYIN' MOUTH Jack King, they all took cash in various ways. It is one of the ugliest and most disgusting things about this whole Apollo fraud business. And when one considers that since its inception, every single American President has known about it, the Fraud, probably not the kickback details, but regardless, it really does make one wonder. A nice little piece as regards the significance , THE MEANING OF APOLLO IN THESE POIGNANT TERMS seems due.

reply to post by decisively

And when one considers that since its inception, every single American President has known about it, the Fraud, probably not the kickback details, but regardless, it really does make one wonder.

Yes. It makes me wonder why the Clintons, who campaigned vigorously for Nixon's impeachment, did not "spill the beans."

reply to post by decisively

Preemptive strike

I'll post a big knarly heinous anxiety producer for the ain'tstronauts, post a big detailed thing on the Woods Hole Conference

Here, let me do it, since you would rather spend the next few days making up stories about yourself rather than staying on topic:

www.nap.edu...

Here are some of the recommendations you are about to distort to score a few cheap points:





I don't see anything there about screening them for immunity to German Measles, do you? On the other hand, I do see that the recommendation of a pre-flight "isolation period" was implemented. Oh; and it says something about gastroenteritis, as well:



See what happens when you waste your time making up stories about ICU nurses, Timmy and your sisters? You're already playing defense before you've even taken your shot.

Powerful Drug

The obsession with apollo conspiracy theories has been compared to an addiction. Once one has delved deeply into this mindset, recovery—a return to balanced, sound thinking—is rare. What motivates a person to immerse himself in them in the first place?

Conspiracy theories are a powerful source of pride and a wellspring of intellectual vanity. The theorist comes to see himself as thinking on a higher plane than the ignorant masses around him. He walks the fringes of society, watching his surroundings with suspicion. No one realizes what’s going on, he thinks.

If speaking his mind on conspiracies causes others to recoil, he simply dismisses them as “dumb sheep” who cannot see what he sees. Every episode like this further reaffirms how special this inside information makes him.

While many Apollo conspiracy enthusiasts lack education, the supposed inside knowledge they gain makes them feel superior—one of the elite, enlightened few. “Besides, who needs schools? They’re just brainwashing centers run by ‘the machine,’” right?

Many of these individuals enjoy the thrill of perceived danger that comes along with having supposedly top-secret knowledge, feeling as though they have a lead role in a secret-agent film—except they are not in a movie!

realtruth.org...



P.S

Decisively the jigs up! and as for you being a doctor, lmfao who thinks rubella in males
Are brought on by pre eclampsyia, then i would suggest finding a corner in the world to go
hide in my freind .

Double o Decisively licence to shill.. On a last note to add: your theorys are shaken and absurd.

Originally posted by choos

its just a selection process.. public relations issues.. be quite irresponsible for NASA to send up an under prepared astronaut when there were others who were well prepared, especially should something go wrong..

The main point here is that Deke does not select the astronauts on his own. He only nominated the astronauts, the list is sent to Washington, where it was approved or disapproved, by the faceless, and remaining nameless, ubiquitous them, the NASA bureaucracy.

Deke Slayton, C I A station chief, kept the information to himself until the appropriate time of release. For example, the Apollo 11 crew were announced to the public on Richard Nixon's birthday, January 9, 1969.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

The main point here is that Deke does not select the astronauts on his own. He only nominated the astronauts, the list is sent to Washington, where it was approved or disapproved, by the faceless, and remaining nameless, ubiquitous them, the NASA bureaucracy.

Deke Slayton, C I A station chief, kept the information to himself until the appropriate time of release. For example, the Apollo 11 crew were announced to the public on Richard Nixon's birthday, January 9, 1969.

yes and there is nothing wrong with the selection process.. there only appears to be a conspiracy because you are severely biased, proven in the way how you mentioned that the apollo 11 crew were announced on Nixon's birthday, which is irrelevant to anything, you probably believe there is some conspiracy there too otherwise you wouldnt have mentioned it..

As Promised , the Edgar Mitchell quote from the Stu Roosa Biography, Serving up PERPS and exposing Missions as the bogus charades they are, the name of the game, my very favorite Pasttime, Happy 4th Everyone, especially to the PERP Ain'tstronauts

Recall the good Apollo EECOM Sy Leibergot's version of things, his Apollo 13 tale, the time leading up to the "accident", the alleged explosion, and then the aftermath of the same.



Sy says that the MOCR was empty, not even the press was around , and Sy likes to show this picture to prove it.



Just flight officers in the MOCR there, "boring" per Leibergot, the period leading up to the alleged explosion, no astronauts, none, and why would there be ? Leibergot said not even the press was present.

Directly contradicting Leibergot was/is John Young, claiming he was standing behind Leibergot at the time of the "explosion" and could tell from looking at Leibergot's EECOM screens that what they were dealing with was not an instumentational problem, but rather a genuine hardware problem. John Young claimed he was right therein the MOCR at the time the photo just above was taken. What does the guy have, a suit that makes him invisible ?



For those not familiar with Sy's full story, I encourage you to take the time to view his video: APOLLO 13: ANATOMY OF THE FAILURE;



So according to Leibergot, and he must be correct with respect to this point, this plain as a pic in front of us fact, the MOCR was empty before the "tank blew". By empty, Leibergot meant, and means, only flight officers were present, no astronauts were there for starters that night, no press either. It wasn't until the tank blew that people started to show up.

Given Leibergot's crystal clarity here, his clear statement in describing the MOCR as boring, a place inhabited only by flight officers, no astronauts, no press, no one around there but Leibergot and colleagues that evening, what in the world was/is up with astronaut John Young regarding his claims about all of this, telling us Leibergot was full of it, and that he, John Young, was right smack dab behind Sy when the tank blew, and how he, Mr. Clairvoyance, John Young, knew that Leibergot was wrong early on ?

Well, funny thing is, that kind of BULL peddling was/is contagious. Edgar Mitchell engaged in telling such tall and very phony tales as well. Here is a QUOTE from the Stu Roosa biography, SMOKE JUMPER, MOON PILOT, THE REMARKABLE STORY OF THE LIFE OF APOLLO 14 ASTRONAUT STUART ROOSA, Willie G. Moseley, Acclaim Press, 2011. Here's Edgar Mitchell from page 127 of Moseley's book;

" As soon as we were sure___ and this was within minutes____ that it was a real problem, and not a telemetry problem, I got into a quick conference with the flight director, and it was decided that I should immediately go into the Lunar Module simulator and start working on what the crew would have to do, using the Lunar Module as a "lifeboat" ".

So what's going on here ? apart from the lying ? The lying is obvious. Mitchell cannot possibly be in the MOCR when the tank blows, or what, is he sitting next to his phone at home, waiting for Kranz to call him a few minutes after the tank blows ? Mitchell doesn't know within minutes that it was a "real" and not a telemetry problem. Not even Kranz himself claimed that, and we already caught his sorry rump in a PERP bustin' lie on this. Of course the astronauts were not there . No reason for them, Young and Mitchell, to be there, and Leibergot has a photo to support his telling of things. Well, keep in mind that with relatively few exceptions, these flight officers are HONEST, and given the fact that this thing is fake , given the fact that Apollo 13 and the whole "explosion" bit was staged, the PERPS have to lead the flight officers, bait them more or less, and so this is where/why Lovell comes up with the "we're venting something" line. He is hoping the flight officers , LEIBERGOT, will BITE and infer the substance venting must be oxygen. But quite rightly, Leiberegot and cohorts view an instrumentation problem as quite possible, if not full on probable, this, in light of the multifaceted aspect of the "faillure".

Because something was "venting " , should not have, and early on in this staged drama, did not by any means in the minds of the flight officers rule out an instrumentation problem as primarily responsible. In addition, there were other things that could have been "venting " , other super cool gases and what not; nitrogen, hydrogen, helium, water. When Lovell delivered the "venting" line, the assumption was the flight officers would bite and at least diagnose an oxygen leak. As such, the "venting" line was Kranz's signal to deliver the "Let's use the LM as "lifeboat" speech". But THAT WAS PREMATURE !!!!!! The flight officers, didn't buy in early on. They remained open minded.

So the astronauts, Young and Micthell, they provide this story to bolster Kranz and his bogus version of things. By delivering those lines so early on, Kranz has identified himself as a PERP. No reason to have said that. Young and Mitchell try to rescue him with their lies ...

reply to post by decisively

So the astronauts, Young and Micthell, they provide this story to bolster Kranz and his bogus version of things. By delivering those lines so early on, Kranz has identified himself as a PERP. No reason to have said that. Young and Mitchell try to rescue him with their lies ...

How does publicly contradicting someone bolster their lie? I'm afraid that you have spent too much time combing through obscure books about Apollo. You clearly have not been keeping up with your medical journals. Cognitive scientists have been discovering some truly disturbing things about memory:

discovermagazine.com...

Of course, as an amateur historian, you already knew all this.

reply to post by decisively


All you have done is regugitate what you've already stated earlier in this thread, and have been shot down several times.

Your subjective opinion is not proof of anything, except that you clearly do not understand emergency management and how people react.

What you are showing here in this thread is just like a team winning a baseball game, and then saying it had to be staged because the players did their job too good, and many years later are remembering exactly how the game went down with certain aspects wrong or mistaken (oh my god, that old man is not remembering exactly where he was in left field...the whole game was fake!)

Your opinion might carry more weight if your credibility here was better, but it's not. You've been shown to mislead people and pretend to be things that you are not. Everyone on ATS is seeing that.

I'd recommend that you drop this line of reasoning (for now), and fall back on some actual physical evidence that helps your case instead.

Mainly because your opinion around here is very short on credibility.

reply to post by eriktheawful

Mainly because your opinion around here is very short on credibility.

The irony is that being a world class swimmer might actually be decisively's only genuine accomplishment, but he has been caught lying so often that no-one will ever believe it.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

Mainly because your opinion around here is very short on credibility.

The irony is that being a world class swimmer might actually be decisively's only genuine accomplishment, but he has been caught lying so often that no-one will ever believe it.

Exactly. And while talking about the poster is never a good thing as the mods here will tell us, the problem is:

We're given a story by someone and told to believe something because of their opinion and speculation. No actual evidence.

When that happens we DO have to look at the poster making those claims. Being able to believe what they are posting in this case depends upon their credibility and character.

On the internet, you can be anyone you want to be. But if you are going to make people believe something on your word alone, then you need to back up what you are claiming either with hard evidence or because you've shown that everything you've said is the truth.

And that last part means backing up what you've said about yourself.

However, if you get caught giving misinformation about yourself, then your credibility drops to zero.

Sometimes this might mean revealing who you really are, and many on here don't want to do that of course. But then if you really believe in what you are saying you may have to do just that. Especially if you've been called out on who you say you are.

If instead someone keeps claiming things about themselves and have been caught giving misinformation, and continue to hide behind the computer screen.........

Exactly how is everyone here suppose to take them or whatever they say seriously?

This is why I'm recommending that he drops this thread, at least for a while, and go back to discussing actual evidence (real, honest to god evidence.....not someone's memory, or opinion). Like the thread that was started up recently about the LM and CM module separation. That was a much better idea to look at.

reply to post by eriktheawful

We're given a story by someone and told to believe something because of their opinion and speculation. No actual evidence.

Yet another irony. He claims that people who refute his claims are committing the fallacy of Argument From Authority, yet most of his claims have been refuted for their logical inconsistency. On the other hand, most of his claims are based on his "professional opinion," as a result, he must pose as a doctor, navigator, chemist and so forth, in order to establish his authority. It is decisively who argues from authority, not fact or reason. As a result, his threads become increasingly about himself.

Decisively grows bored with actual facts. He seems to have given up on the Apollo 13 re-entry thread because there is no room for his personal opinion; physics is physics. No amount of boasting about himself is going to change the Law of Conservation of Momentum.

Sadly, because he is the "star witness" on his threads, lengthy digressions about his qualifications and personal life, such as this one, are completely "on topic."

ATTENTION!!!!

Please discuss the topic...and not the member

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

You are responsible for your own posts.

We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.

reply to post by DJW001

I don't see anything there about screening them for immunity to German Measles, do you?

It seems like Dr. Berry doesn't know basic medical facts about his astronauts. "Have you ever been exposed to German Measles" would be a basic medical question that would be asked numerous times during the rigorous medical, physical and psychological background checks that were done at the Lovelace clinic.

Was Dr. Charles Berry surprised by the rubella exposure between Duke and Mattingly one week before launch? How could Berry be so ignorant of the astronauts medical histories? These "little red" flags are important.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

juicy and delicious

They were supposed to be tested for rubella and other viruses at the time of their becoming astronauts SayonaraJupiter, and then they were to be tested regularly thereafter, tested in an ongoing fashion if found initially to be antibody negative, if still at risk. This Mattingly measles thing is a big win for our side, very juicy find, delicious really.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

It seems like Dr. Berry doesn't know basic medical facts about his astronauts. "Have you ever been exposed to German Measles" would be a basic medical question that would be asked numerous times during the rigorous medical, physical and psychological background checks that were done at the Lovelace clinic.

And Mattingly would have said: "Of course. Everybody got Measles as a kid." It's not Dr. Berry's fault that his medical knowledge includes the fact that over 80% of all people would have contracted rubella as a child and would be immune as an adult. No need to screen for that in a blood serum test, right?

reply to post by decisively

Delicious irony

They were supposed to be tested for rubella and other viruses at the time of their becoming astronauts SayonaraJupiter, and then they were to be tested regularly thereafter, tested in an ongoing fashion if found initially to be antibody negative, if still at risk. This Mattingly measles thing is a big win for our side, very juicy find, delicious really.

Please re-read this document:

www.nap.edu...

Note the underlined word: recommendation. They did not necessarily implement all of these recommendations in a rigorous manner. As pointed out above, they may simply have accepted Mattingly's verbal assertion that he was now immune to German Measles. The crucial point is that once Mattingly was found to be in less than perfect health, he was bumped from the mission and replaced by a back-up. Why do that if they weren't really going anywhere? Wouldn't that require them to completely rewrite the script if it was really just a movie?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

It seems like Dr. Berry doesn't know basic medical facts about his astronauts. "Have you ever been exposed to German Measles" would be a basic medical question that would be asked numerous times during the rigorous medical, physical and psychological background checks that were done at the Lovelace clinic.

And Mattingly would have said: "Of course. Everybody got Measles as a kid." It's not Dr. Berry's fault that his medical knowledge includes the fact that over 80% of all people would have contracted rubella as a child and would be immune as an adult. No need to screen for that in a blood serum test, right?

At Lovelace clinic they injected water at 0 degree centigrade into the ears of the astronaut candidates to test for vertigo. But they skipped the rubella screening? I find that hard to believe.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

At Lovelace clinic they injected water at 0 degree centigrade into the ears of the astronaut candidates to test for vertigo. But they skipped the rubella screening? I find that hard to believe.

The "rubella screening" would consist of a doctor asking: "Have you ever had German Measles? Chicken Pox? Mumps?" This was 1960.

In the NASA film titled "Houston We HAve A Problem" at 5:30 Sy Leibergot is heard to say there was zero N2(nitrogen) pressure in fuel cell 1 line. This confirms the OP's point made several times that there were several gases that could have been venting. If the N2 pressure in line one was zero, it may have been N2 leaking. Gases(including water) in the service module bay were;

1) Nitrogen

2) Oxygen

3) Helium

4) Water

5) Hydrogen

6) mix

Take a listen for yourself.






Also note that John Young is not present in any of the preexplosion footage. This contradicts Young's claim that he was present and confirms the OP's point.

Springer published a lot of footage of the MOCR taken prior to the explosion. I will post all of that so that everyone may take a look and confirm for themselves that John Young was in fact lying about being present at the time the oxygen tank was alleged to have blown up.